A thousand years as one day

“One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”

This verse is usually used by foolish Creationists — but I repeat myself — and other calculators of the apocalypse. But what they use is exactly the wrong part of it: the first.

The explanation of all the problems of Christianity, all the procrastination and delayed parousias, all the disappointments and silences, is contained not in the first, but in the second part: “…and a thousand years [are] as one day”.

Circa 33 AD, Easterish, Jesus was raised back into Heaven. And could you blame the guy for taking a weekend off?

A weekend is two days; that is, two thousand years.

Circa 2033 AD, Easterish, the Heavenly Monday will come, and Jesus will be rested and actually start working again: then faith will literally move mountains, and snake-handlers will have no trouble with getting insurance. And round the Heavenly Coffee-Hour, circa 2155 AD, Jesus will mutter “Bugger this shit, I hate Mondays” — and the end will come.

Share this:

Related

This entry was posted on May 30, 2011 at 21:29 and is filed under religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to “A thousand years as one day”

(I used to be mhilm at http://thinklovesurvive.wordpress.com/)
‘Nailed: 10 Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed’ by David Fitzgerald
Now, when I was in college, I tried an experiment. I would be a true believer (christianity) for a year. Took theology classes, even. I recall being taught much of the stuff in this book, but without the deeper research.
I’m enjoying the book- but then, learning how ignorant (gullible?) I’ve been is a necessary step to being better informed. :)
Totally unrelated: I used your second definition of kaamos in a novel I’m working on. My editor looked it up and told me I had it wrong. So I looked it up. Your definition: “second meaning of the word kaamos — namely, a mental state: winter depression.” isn’t given in any of the first page results. Is this more an idiomatic usage?

Yeah, it’s idiomatic, and a little bit melodramatic: using the word for the thing for one of its effects. The first definition is the vastly more common one; the second definition/allusion kind of rides that, and usually works best when written very close to the first, almost as not a mental state but a mental illness or an external agency. I might have better phrased it as “or the solar absence and the mental state that brings”.

Ah well; I find that either I can’t explain it all that well, or then wrote it not entirely defensibly in the first place.

(It would be more “proper” I guess to talk of “kaamosmasennus” or “kaamosväsymys” (kaamos depression/depressio hiemalis and kaamos exhaustion), but that’s out with brevity, in with gratuitous Finnish!)

Good luck (fortuitous clusterings of probabilistic happenings?) with the novel!